This thread shall serve as a central location for all requests for help with specific translations. These requests seem to pop up in various other places, and I thought I would attempt to bring them into one central location.

I'll put a few links to other translation discussions around the forum so they're easily-accessible from here:

Maybe someone could help with this one. I'm looking for a term meaning something like hide in plain sight, or hidden in plain sight. Would that be "hodasal[ar]" -camouflage and \or cover up? Or wouldn't they be close enough in meaning?

It's possible that nuhaatyc (invisible, unseen) or werdla (stealthy, invisible) may apply to this situation. It's 02:30 here and I'm tired, so it's all I can come up with right now. I'll hop back on tomorrow (later today) and give it another shot with a fresh mind.

ori'sol comes from solus. There are many related words such as naysol (too many), ge'sol (half), kisol (few).

birov has no root that I can find, and no similar words which don't involve the "sol" stem. I would personally go with anything involving the "sol" stem, just for consistency and flexibility. I'm not sure where birov came from, but I feel like it's likely either an oversight or possibly the original word for "many" before Karen revised the concept and added more related words, each with the same stem, from the same root.

But that's just my personal choice. I'd say use whichever makes the most sense or sounds the best in the context.

Bah is dative, which means it designates the indirect object of an action as in "Princess Leia gave a medal to Han and Luke." Princess Leia is the subject, gave is the verb, the medal is the direct object, and Han and Luke are the indirect objects. to Han and Luke is a prepositional phrase, which designates the indirect objects -- in this case, the recipients of an action.

Bah is dative, which means it designates the indirect object of an action as in "Princess Leia gave a medal to Han and Luke." Princess Leia is the subject, gave is the verb, the medal is the direct object, and Han and Luke are the indirect objects. to Han and Luke is a prepositional phrase, which designates the indirect objects -- in this case, the recipients of an action.

I believe the difference between ibac and meg is like so: "That(ibac) is the train that(meg) I'm going to ride." Use meg wherever that could be replaced with which (or in some dialects/situations, what, as in "That(ibac) is what(meg) I'm doing.")

Adi'karta wrote:I believe the difference between ibac and meg is like so: "That(ibac) is the train that(meg) I'm going to ride." Use meg wherever that could be replaced with which (or in some dialects/situations, what, as in "That(ibac) is what(meg) I'm doing.")

My Father, I love you. My Father, I will always remember you. My Father, you will forever live on in me. My Father, you are the best of the best. My Father, I am honoured to be your son. The last line that reads “Ni su'cuyi, gar kyr'adyc, ni partaylir, gar darasuum Papa.”

Shab. Just got another idea which would make the whole thing a non-issue.

Mandos don't say 'I love you'. They show. So a short verbal version would be useless. The other would know from the actions how things are and actually saying 'I love you' would require a context in which the length of the expression doesn't actually amtter.

Not sure how to explain that well. From my experience Americans tend to throw a good many 'I love you's around. You here that a lot less in Germany (changing in younger generations because imitating the states.)

Well, it makes sense in my head. And personally I think we'd be off a lot better if we couldn't so easily excuse our actions with words...

I am the very model of a modern Mandalorian...Ve'vut sur'haaise darasuum!